3 ms·
Beating people up isn't market activity - it's at least borderline criminal. Every 14 year old Libertarian will bleat "but that's force" and they'd be right :)
by ArkyBeagle 11y ago
Beating people up isn't market activity - it's at least borderline criminal. Every 14 year old Libertarian will bleat "but that's force" and they'd be right :)
I agree wholeheartedly - you can't get two, much less three people to agree on market failures. My bias is that they simply don't happen or only happen very rarely , that wealth and power are almost completely illusory and conflate status and money to an embarrassing degree.
I think that some people like stories about oppression ( I used to be one of those people ) and that this explains much of how it is that people disagree about this. A good way to challenge this belief is to read "Chief", a bio of Hearst by David Nasaw. This is why I refer to the Hearst morgue as feedstock for history - it's a lot bunk in that role, but every single person who reads history in what americans call high school gets it full in the face, and it takes some doing to get past it.
- asgard1024 11y ago> Beating people up isn't market activity - it's at least borderline criminal. The beauty of the example is that you don't have to beat people up. What is only needed is A to risk more than B and C. The point was though you cannot prevent this kind of activity taking place on the market (it can actually be reformulated through money and investment, existence of which also requires 3 parties). So by using 2-party model only, you are missing a good chunk of reality here. > My bias is that they simply don't happen or only happen very rarely , that wealth and power are almost completely illusory I guess we can agree we live in a different reality, then :-)